[2e] Using Oriental Adventures Family Table to determine Birthright Blood Strength

[LibraryOgre]

Sorry to have a link to a Gdoc, but it's pretty much all tables. The it's pretty much what it says on the tin; in the original Birthright Boxed Set, your blood strength was determined by rolling d% to determine category, and then a handful of dice to determine your bloodline strength. This changes it to a single 3d10 roll for your initial bloodline strength, but modified by your family history. If you start with a high bloodline, you have a longer history, with more events that indicate your family likely had a strong bloodline. Likewise, however, if you have a strong bloodline, you have more powers.

This increases the commonality of certain powers, and puts more choice in the hands of players as to what powers they gain.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1oI_PDk03SitMa8ltJSK06A0Ui2cAtlCeb6PWrL55aN0/edit#gid=0

[Tiktakkat]

It looks like it is missing some negative symbols (-).
A criminal past gains you 10 Bloodline Strength?
A common bloodline gains you 15 Bloodline Strength?

Otherwise that looks very interesting.
I had forgotten about those tables.
I wonder how they would adapt to other purposes, like for say Eberron-type Dragonmark Houses, or even more generic organizations.
(Yes, I know those are D20. I adapt a lot of old material forward.)

[LibraryOgre]

It looks like it is missing some negative symbols (-).
A criminal past gains you 10 Bloodline Strength?
A common bloodline gains you 15 Bloodline Strength?

Otherwise that looks very interesting.
I had forgotten about those tables.
I wonder how they would adapt to other purposes, like for say Eberron-type Dragonmark Houses, or even more generic organizations.
(Yes, I know those are D20. I adapt a lot of old material forward.)

Nope, not missing. Intentionally removed and, in the case of the Common Bloodline, purposefully reworked (and, whoa, left off the original. Time to fix that...)

The idea was, if your bloodline had a major impact on the world, there was likely something special about it. So, if your ancestor was a notorious criminal, that would sap an OA family of Honor, but in Birthright, it likely means he had more powerful blood (since the blooded tend to be movers and shakers in that society). Sure, someone with a 3 blood strength might become a notorious criminal... but that will also carry with it the opportunity to increase his blood score, either through blood theft, investiture, or regency, and so his descendants are more likely to have a high blood strength than the guy who had that 3 and lived out his entire life as a dirt farmer.

EDIT: Fixed; I'd come up with why "Common Bloodline" meant a bonus, but not written it up. Thanks for the note.

[Tiktakkat]

I thought that might be the intent, particularly as it looks a bit curious having such major modifiers, particularly so high up the table. Certainly it makes sense in the different context, particularly with Azrai bloodlines, where the negatives would be potent positives. And your rework of the definition of "Common Bloodline" fits in neatly as well.

So again, nice. Very nice.

[LibraryOgre]

I thought that might be the intent, particularly as it looks a bit curious having such major modifiers, particularly so high up the table. Certainly it makes sense in the different context, particularly with Azrai bloodlines, where the negatives would be potent positives. And your rework of the definition of "Common Bloodline" fits in neatly as well.

So again, nice. Very nice.

Thanks. As for major modifiers high up, I do change the math a little bit.

BRCS rules gives a "Tainted" bloodline 4d4 blood strength...minimum 4, maximum 15, average 10. This version has a minimum of 3, but the Criminal makes that possibly an 18 (without assuming an improbable chain of "Roll next highest die" rolls).

[Tiktakkat]

Ah!
Okay, it has been years since I've reviewed the original Bloodline rules, and didn't recall the exact numbers.
If you've tweaked it like that, then . . .
There is nothing left for me to question. You've covered it all. :smallbiggrin:

[LibraryOgre]

I floated the idea in a blog post like 7 years ago, and only sat down to do it a couple nights ago.